[License-discuss] Words that don't mean derivative work

[Lawrence Rosen]

Simon Phipps the other day used the word "integration" to mean "derivative
work." Recently on this and other open source email lists we've seen
"combinations," "inclusion," "kernel space," "shim," "interface" and "API",
"header file", and "linking".

 

None of those is ipso facto a derivative work under U.S. copyright law. This
is unfortunate for those of us who want to obey licenses. Wouldn't it be
nice if the following sentence - by mutual agreement - was added to ALL of
our FOSS licenses:

 

Licensor hereby additionally asserts that the copyleft, reciprocity, or
derivative work obligations in this license only apply to software that is
modified or expressly changed in its executable or source code form.

 

This is just a wish that the FOSS community could, in our vernacular,
cooperate that consistently with the copyright law.

 

/Larry

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20160130/447c2cb3/attachment.html>